• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pearl Harbor a conspiracy

camlok said:
You have found nothing, eh, mike?

That is anti-truth.

You know you can, you know you could find something if you happened to be of the mind to discover the truth.
Click to expand...

So you won't share the link/source that convinced you. Thought you would want to share the knowledge. Guess not.
 
mike2810 said:
Is it possible the New American is putting out fake news? Is it possible the editors are brainwashed to be involved in the CT regarding Roosevelt? Seems your question could be applied to anyone.
Click to expand...

It is much more likely that these diversions you are attempting can be applied to the US, to its "historians", to its "academics", to its governments, because we all know that fake news is their daily bread, propaganda is the very lifeblood of the USA. Brainwashed is what happens to US citizens starting at birth.
 
camlok said:
It is much more likely that these diversions you are attempting can be applied to the US, to its "historians", to its "academics", to its governments, because we all know that fake news is their daily bread, propaganda is the very lifeblood of the USA. Brainwashed is what happens to US citizens starting at birth.
Click to expand...

Good grief.
No it is part of discussing and debating. If I know what source you use it eliminates any misunderstanding of what you posted. I can read the same article as you. It seems you don't want to do that.

Your line of what sources I use is old and tiring. Yet, you don't share yours. Why?
 
mike2810 said:
So you won't share the link/source that convinced you. Thought you would want to share the knowledge. Guess not.
Click to expand...

I never said that at all, mike. That is how anti-truthers operate. They leap to illogical conclusions, accuse people who seek the truth of being dishonest when anti-truther really says it all. Don't you agree?
 
mike2810 said:
Good grief.
No it is part of discussing and debating. If I know what source you use it eliminates any misunderstanding of what you posted.
Click to expand...

That's not how anti-truthers work. They advance things all the time without ever providing any sources. Just as you haven't. Then they attack truth seekers sources and try to malign them, just as you have done.

mike2810 said:
Your line of what sources I use is old and tiring. Yet, you don't share yours. Why?
Click to expand...

Then they pretend they are hurt and blame people who seek the truth by whining when all that is being done is pointing out anti-truthers deceptions.
 
camlok said:
I never said that at all, mike. That is how anti-truthers operate. They leap to illogical conclusions, accuse people who seek the truth of being dishonest when anti-truther really says it all. Don't you agree?
Click to expand...


No I do not agree with your anti truthers statement.

Where is the link in the post you responded to my post?


Of course you didn't post that you won't. It is evident that you won't because your reply to my request did not contain a link to your source.
.
 
mike2810 said:
No I do not agree with your anti truthers statement.

Where is the link in the post you responded to my post?


Of course you didn't post that you won't. It is evident that you won't because your reply to my request did not contain a link to your source.
.
Click to expand...

Of course you don't agree with it, that's how anti-truthers work. Then they use purposefully unclear things like, "Where is the link in the post you responded to my post?", attempting to get off on pages and pages of "discussion" to divert attention away from the truth.

Then comes the Orwellian doublespeak,

"Of course you didn't post that you won't. It is evident that you won't because your reply to my request did not contain a link to your source."

which is best for anti-truthers if it is indecipherable English - that provides a further opportunity to cause more pages and pages of diversion.
 
In the interests of honesty and truthfulness, not to mention fairness, one would expect to see the anti-truthers petitioning the moderators to include their appellation/names/apt descriptions in the headings for the Conspiracy Theory Forum - 911 anti-truthers, Secret US government plots, Alt-Right alternative histories, US government assassinations, CIA overthrows of governments, ... .
 
mike2810 said:
No I do not agree with your anti truthers statement.
Click to expand...

Yet you provide no source nor any reasoned discussion to gain a deeper understanding of what you clearly know is the truth.

Anti-truthers are the ones who outright deny reality, who obfuscate with wild abandon, who use trickery or deception, depending on their skill level. They are world famous at using ad hominems, even ones that make no sense, like 'truthers', but they rely on volume, unrelenting shrieking to drive home their "points".

No proof is ever advanced in support of their support for US government conspiracy theories.

Everyone should know that the very term 'conspiracy theory' was invented and promulgated by the CIA, the masters of lies, deception, torture, illegal renditions, worldwide torture chambers and gulags, disinformation, Orwellian language fed to a gullible public.

The Term “Conspiracy Theory” Was Invented by the CIA In Order To Prevent Disbelief of Official Government Stories
August 24, 2016 | Categories: Guest Contributions | Tags: | Print This Article Print This Article
The Term “Conspiracy Theory” Was Invented by the CIA In Order To Prevent Disbelief of Official Government Stories

Ron Unz reports on the cold shoulder given to an extensively researched book that concludes that World War II hero General George Patton was murdered by the CIA because he became a powerful critic of Washington. American Pravda: Was General Patton Assassinated? - The Unz Review

The book was ignored because the US media and public have been programmed to regard the US government as a truth-teller and those who expose government crimes as “conspiracy theorists.”

In 2013 Professor Lance Dehaven-Smith in a peer-reviewed book published by the University of Texas Press showed that the term “conspiracy theory” was developed by the CIA as a means of undercutting critics of the Warren Commission’s report that President Kennedy was killed by Oswald. The use of this term was heavily promoted in the media by the CIA. https://www.amazon.com/Conspiracy-T...&sr=1-1&keywords=Conspiracy+Theory+in+America

It is ironic that the American left is a major enforcer of the CIA’s strategy to shut up skeptics by branding them conspiracy theorists.
Click to expand...

It's hardly just the American left. It is American left, right, "libertarians" [some of the worst], alt-right, far right, wacky far right, ... .
 
camlok said:
Of course you don't agree with it, that's how anti-truthers work. Then they use purposefully unclear things like, "Where is the link in the post you responded to my post?", attempting to get off on pages and pages of "discussion" to divert attention away from the truth.

Then comes the Orwellian doublespeak,

"Of course you didn't post that you won't. It is evident that you won't because your reply to my request did not contain a link to your source."

which is best for anti-truthers if it is indecipherable English - that provides a further opportunity to cause more pages and pages of diversion.
Click to expand...

The only diversion is your failure to provide a link that was asked for.

Till you do I will not respond to any more of your posts.
 
Pin dÁr said:
okido

View attachment 67217504
Click to expand...

Saying they knew about it and saying they should have known are separate. It's just like intelligence reports before 9/11. Possibly both should have been prevented but they did not know where and when these events would occur. You have to know the where too in order to prevent them

A sensationalist paper, out of many hundreds, took a wild guess and happened to be right on the when...Actually it was off on that too by a week
 
chromium said:
A sensationalist paper, out of many hundreds, took a wild guess and happened to be right on the when...Actually it was off on that too by a week
Click to expand...


You are just name calling now and have no clue.
 
mike2810 said:
The only diversion is your failure to provide a link that was asked for.

Till you do I will not respond to any more of your posts.
Click to expand...

That's a favorite anti-truther meme. That is definitely one of your favorite memes.

Why don't you provide an anti-truther source that defends Roosevelt against the completely logical charge that he helped murder how many US military folks just to get the US into WWII, which, you must note, was what he wanted all along.

And for the most base, amoral of reasons - because he knew that a new powerful Germany would wreak havoc with US plans for taking over European colonial powers' colonial empires. So here is the USA, doing business with the Nazis right up until 1942, sacrificing American lives because they saw not only wealth for them but a tremendous opportunity for the propaganda triumph of all world history - "we saved the world for freedom". Which has been relentlessly and sickenly used to build on all the other US propaganda.

Really, think about it! How deeply amoral, immoral, repugnant, base, sordid, ... is that?

That that has happened so many times in US history, accompanied by the attendant, woefully transparent lies, should give thinking people pause.

That it doesn't give the gullible, the anti-truthers, the brainwashed too much pause hardly comes as any surprise. Such is the power of cognitive dissonance.
 
chromium said:
Saying they knew about it and saying they should have known are separate. It's just like intelligence reports before 9/11. Possibly both should have been prevented but they did not know where and when these events would occur. You have to know the where too in order to prevent them
Click to expand...

More anti-truthing. Have you folks no shame?

Everything was known in both situations, 911 and Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt was a racist and after he allowed the attack on PH, he wasted no time in planning the theft of how many millions/billions of dollars in wealth from Japanese Americans.

That anti-truthers can advance such arrant nonsense tells everyone all one has to know. You know full well what is out there that describes exactly what the US government planned and pretended it was "terrorists". This same dog and pony show has been used umpteen thousand times and you folks still want to trot it out for everyone to see.

How gullible is that?
 
camlok said:
That is so US propaganda; that is so lame.

Why no mention of the US being involved in ME oil as far back as the 1920s. No mention of US support for myriad right wing dictators.

Why no mention of the fact that the "radical Muslim/Islam" meme never became a US propagandist meme until the gigantic US 911 lies.

You folks are the ones that really need to read more about history and drop the phony US propaganda.

Right wingers are especially reluctant to bring up the fact that the US always supports right wing, brutal, vicious dictators. Why do you think that is the case, RetiredUSN?
Click to expand...

Coming from somebody like you, who doesn't know anything about US history(for example, you knew nothing about the multitude of war crimes the VC and NVA committed--- crimes their members freely admit to) your claims simply don't hold water.

You don't care about "brutal right wing dictators". You are just upset that those dictators didn't murder as many of their own people
as you wanted them to.
 
camlok said:
That is so US propaganda; that is so lame.

Why no mention of the US being involved in ME oil as far back as the 1920s. No mention of US support for myriad right wing dictators.

Why no mention of the fact that the "radical Muslim/Islam" meme never became a US propagandist meme until the gigantic US 911 lies.

You folks are the ones that really need to read more about history and drop the phony US propaganda.

Right wingers are especially reluctant to bring up the fact that the US always supports right wing, brutal, vicious dictators. Why do you think that is the case, RetiredUSN?
Click to expand...

You need to pipe down until you have the actual overall picture because you are sounding more foolish with every keyboard stroke.

Modern radical Islam began in 1928 and was mainly influenced by Europeans taking over their countries with guns.

Right wing or left wing is still better than being on the "nutter bus"
 
Tigerace117 said:
Coming from somebody like you, .
Click to expand...

A typical antitruther rant, Tiger. I quote many sources that do know the sordid history of the USA and all you do is ignore and do an antitruther rant.

I actually predicted this. Isn't that uncanny?
 
RetiredUSN said:
You need to pipe down until you have the actual overall picture because you are sounding more foolish with every keyboard stroke.

Modern radical Islam began in 1928 and was mainly influenced by Europeans taking over their countries with guns.

Right wing or left wing is still better than being on the "nutter bus"
Click to expand...

I'm always impressed by antitruther sources. Not so much by antitruther rants.

Why are you folks so upset by accurate historical accounts? Could it be cognitive dissonance from the many years of brainswashing?

And don't try to deny that the US employs deep brainwashing techniques. You all are famous for it.
 
camlok said:
A typical antitruther rant, Tiger. I quote many sources that do know the sordid history of the USA and all you do is ignore and do an antitruther rant.

I actually predicted this. Isn't that uncanny?
Click to expand...

I bet you predicted I'd point out the many flaws in your argument. I guess you are so used to having people expose your arguments for the nonsense they are you start expecting it after a while.
 
Pin dÁr said:
Did President Franklin Roosevelt knew Pearl Harbor would be attacked.?


Yes, of course!...


oh btw 9-11 was called 'the new pearl harbor'! Hmm that is saying something eh?!
Click to expand...

I have to agree. If he didn't that would be the greatest blunder by a president in American History. The fact that our Pacific fleet was not patrolling the coast of the united states and reconnaissance air craft were not making sure the Japanese did not sneak up on our west coast or pearl harbor is beyond belief. A world War was underway. We were implementing sanctions against an aggressive country attacking China, Russia, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Cong, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, and just about everyone else in the pacific. To think they would not attack Hawaii and our Pacific Fleet is ludicrous. Only and idiot would not have seen the attack coming.
 
Tigerace117 said:
I bet you predicted I'd point out the many flaws in your argument. I guess you are so used to having people expose your arguments for the nonsense they are you start expecting it after a while.
Click to expand...

The first thing is impossible, you never address sources or arguments.

But I sure did predict the rest.

Why do you folks have so much trouble addressing the truth but you excel at your type of nonsense, which has been coming since you decided you'd rather not discuss history?
 
camlok said:
The first thing is impossible, you never address sources or arguments.

But I sure did predict the rest.

Why do you folks have so much trouble addressing the truth but you excel at your type of nonsense, which has been coming since you decided you'd rather not discuss history?
Click to expand...

While I'm not suprised that you are delusional enough to think its impossible that there are gaping holes in your argument......there are.

What you call history has no relation to reality. Just like the rest of your confederates' own delusions.
 
Tigerace117 said:
While I'm not suprised that you are delusional enough to think its impossible that there are gaping holes in your argument......there are.

What you call history has no relation to reality. Just like the rest of your confederates' own delusions.
Click to expand...

See, you never address the history, the US experts, like John Stockwell, the top awarded CIA agent who describes, as he states, with US governments sources, the incredible depravity that is the USA post WWII.

This is so antitruther of you.
 
camlok said:
See, you never address the history, the US experts, like John Stockwell, the top awarded CIA agent who describes, as he states, with US governments sources, the incredible depravity that is the USA post WWII.

This is so antitruther of you.
Click to expand...

You seem to think John Stockwell states something other than what he does. Also, unlike you, nowhere does John Stockwell state rhe idiotic fiction that most conspiracy theorists like you love so much.

Yes, you and your buddies are quite deprived.
 
Tigerace117 said:
You seem to think John Stockwell states something other than what he does. .
Click to expand...

Still no evidence from the right wing defenders of the US war criminals/terrorists/murders/thieves/rapists.

Mr Stockwell states it all perfectly. He describes what I have described in the sentence above.


The Center for Defense Information counts sixty wars that are being fought in the world today, in which they estimate that five million people will die. The U.S. is on the brink of its next war: the Central American War. In this situation of a volatile world, about as troubled as it can get, the U.S. CIA is running fifty covert actions, destabilizing further almost one third of the countries in the world today.

Now these things interrelate. The nuclear arms race, conventional wars, the world debt, CIA covert actions; they're all viewed from our point of view, they're all part of our national security. They're supervised by the National Security Council. The National Security Advisor advises the President, and we respond to them in terms of our own national security compulsions.

John Stockwell: The Secret Wars of the CIA
Click to expand...


This description, above, is from the 1980s but it describes exactly how the US has always operated, how it is operating today.

Which is why Roosevelt planned to have PH take the hit. He wanted to get into the war because US money grubbers saw a huge opportunity to steal more wealth. And lo and behold, that is exactly what they did in SE Asia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom